Editor’s Note: This is the first in a series of posts that will run this week, written by Randy Townsend, Damita Snow, and Maxine Aldred. Damita is Director for Accessibility and DEI Strategy for ASCE Publications & Standards at the American Society of Civil Engineers,(ASCE). Maxine is Director of the Publications Production at ASCE where she manages staff, budgets, and vendors, in addition to providing oversight and direction for 35 scientific journals and more than 50 books annually.

In the past twelve months, we’ve been subjected to overwhelming volumes of rhetoric claiming that the acronym for diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA), and anything associated with expanding participation, enabling fairness, or disrupting social injustice should be vilified and eliminated. Peer reviewed literature has been removed, career researchers have been discredited, grants have been stripped of references to DEIA, departments have been decommissioned, institutions have been attacked, and our collective identity is in jeopardy.  

DEIA has always been complicated work, but these threats have infected us with a new era of uncertainty, with many of us unsure what to do. Some sit in the shadows, silenced by the angry screams of dog whistles signaling submission, suppression, and censorship. Others quietly compromised their commitment, deleting position statements of support and solidarity, revising policies and practices to avoid political pressure, persecution, and penalties. 

Still, some organizations continue to live their values, serving as beacons to their members, staff, authors, community partners, and industry peers. They attract those who are invigorated by the potential of their commitment, who connect their work to the broader body of initiatives that promote inclusive and equitable professional spaces.

That’s what made the American Society of Civil Engineers’ (ASCE) inaugural Pathways to Inclusive Publishing Summit such a refreshing experience. The Summit brought together industry leaders, content creators, and allies to explore strategies for fostering inclusivity and accessibility within the publishing ecosystem. Under the protection of Chatham House Rule, it empowered registrants to have conversations we’ve been unsure how to conduct freely, at least in the United States, for what feels like a lifetime and discuss topics that have been made to feel criminal. It was an opportunity to revisit our true selves and be reminded that each individual, within and beyond our communities, can make valuable contributions to our industry. The summit featured a diverse menu of professionals and organizations sharing their activities, expanding discussions on diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility, and inspiring attendees to be proud of their commitment. In this three-part series, we’ll go behind the scenes of the summit, speak to the presenters and contributors, and learn successful DEIA strategies and activities employed by different organizations.

In Part 1, we share our candid interview with Summit attendees. To protect the guest authors who contributed to this post from threats or persecution, their identities have been kept anonymous.

Was there a moment from the Summit—perhaps a comment from a speaker or participant—that captured the spirit or urgency of these conversations for you?

(Answer) I wanted to share two things that I found really helpful from the fantastic summit. One note from the chat really resonated with me and I copied it down: “‘Safe haven’ – researchers turning to us to take on the advocacy/community work that they can no longer do in their professional homes.” I don’t recall which session it was in, but I loved the idea that our societies can take on some of the hard advocacy work our members need, on behalf of our members who can’t.

Were you able to envision practical ways to integrate ideas and discussions from the Summit into your organization’s list of priorities?

(Answer) Our organization is focused on providing alt-text in a substantial way in order to promote accessibility and in preparation for ADA II. The resources linked for Inclusive Content Creation & Reading for STM’s Draft Taxonomy were immediately helpful. 

Which organizational challenge related to workplace culture or inclusion is your company currently prioritizing?

(Answer) AI – in awareness that AI is embedded in many assistive technologies, and so policies could unintentionally discriminate against disabled people, those with a different first language and those from non-academic backgrounds.

What improvements or positive changes in your workplace culture have been most meaningful in your organization?

(Answer) Flexibility to accommodate others’ needs.  For example, taking a flexible approach to changes in working practice where they are harder for some than others in order to find a ‘happy medium’ rather than imposing a specific structure.  

Which session or discussion at the Summit stood out to you the most?

(Answer) There was a discussion about reading groups on diversity related topics. That has stuck with me. 

What is one action you plan to take as a result of this Summit?

(Answer) I am currently building a new ‘accessibility’ page for our platform. One discussion at the summit was about user-feedback. I had originally planned the page around giving the user information – but this has changed my perspective, and got me questioning whether the page should have two-way communication, such that accessibility issues can be easily reported there too. 

(Answer) I’ve been working on an AI use case.  The purpose of this use case is primarily educational, but it’s also cautionary about what LLMs really do, especially in image generation.  After the summit, I decided to pursue and incorporate accessibility strategies into my own work, including this Use Case.

What barriers might prevent you from implementing what you learned?

(Answer) Time and resources. We are a very small team. It is likely that the first iteration of my work on this page will not be able to go further than the original scope because doing so would delay releasing it. I’d rather have it out there and only single direction information and update later, than delay it.

(Answer) The initial barrier to entry is that accessibility encompasses a broad range of attributes, each of which has its own advice, directives (and laws) for inclusion.  Additionally, this information is not centralized, so reviewing the resources under accessibility is challenging.  A centralized, plain-language accessibility resource would significantly lower this barrier for everyday content creators.

(Answer) As you work through various platforms, there are accessibility tools, but they only check whether the content is accessible.  They provide very little guidance or education on how to make the work accessible, how to optimize it for screen readers, use closed captions in videos, etc., as the content is being created.

(Answer) Much of the content on social media, such as emojis, is not accessible-friendly for people who use screen readers.  Most of us think nothing of adding emojis in our content. “That meeting was the worst  “, is visually expressive, but a screen reader would say, “That meeting was the worst sad face sad face sad face pile of poo.”  There are variations in screen readers, of course, and it seems kind of funny in this singular context.  But imagine how many emojis we see in social media content, and how that would affect a person using a screen reader.

What would make next year’s Summit more impactful?

(Answer) I’d like some technical topics. But I am not sure whether the audience was technical? I would like a discussion of some of the technical challenges, for example, I’m part of a network in the UK looking at accessible mathematics, and getting maths to show up correctly in online publications is far from straightforward. For example MathML is claimed to be supported widely, but when we tested it, we found a lot of edge-cases that made it unreliable.  That is just one of the technical issues I’m working on finding a ‘work around’ for that challenge making content accessible while waiting for other technologies to improve. I’m not suggesting that topic specifically, I’m using it as an example of the kind of technical topic that impacts accessible publishing once you get down to trying to read an article and find some of the content is not coming through correctly. 

What topics would you like to see explored more deeply at future Summits?

(Answer) For me, similar, I think having a safe space to discuss the technical challenges of making content accessible, rather than talking at higher levels of abstraction about vendors and subcontractors. I’d really like to have “the people who do the work” discussions around problems we’ve encountered, workarounds tried, approaches taken etc.

What’s one resource you’d recommend others read or watch?

(Answer) I’d recommend people join accessibility networks – for example in the UK, I’m part of several. My focus is disability as a subset of inclusion, so I’m in networks of interested people about assistive technologies, accessible mathematics, accessibility in higher education, disabled staff networks etc.  These all have mailing lists and I end up with a good amount of general awareness on topics that need attention that otherwise I’d not know to look for.